Timing of the Rapture

[taisto]

Why would Jesus come to earth the first time, but not come to earth ever again?

Has @canadyjd ever said that Jesus isn't coming to earth ever again? I haven't read that in this thread.

An Amillennial view of Revelation sees the martyrs reigning, presently with Christ, in heaven. When Christ returns to earth, they will join him in His return.

Read these two passages and see how the saints are joined with Christ in heaven as He reigns.

(Ephesians 1:19-22)
I also pray that you will understand the incredible greatness of God’s power for us who believe him. This is the same mighty power that raised Christ from the dead and seated him in the place of honor at God’s right hand in the heavenly realms. Now he is far above any ruler or authority or power or leader or anything else—not only in this world but also in the world to come. God has put all things under the authority of Christ and has made him head over all things for the benefit of the church.

(Ephesians 2:4-7)
But God is so rich in mercy, and he loved us so much, that even though we were dead because of our sins, he gave us life when he raised Christ from the dead. (It is only by God’s grace that you have been saved!) For he raised us from the dead along with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms because we are united with Christ Jesus. So God can point to us in all future ages as examples of the incredible wealth of his grace and kindness toward us, as shown in all he has done for us who are united with Christ Jesus.

 

[Revmitchell]

No, that is not what the verse states.

"After the tribulation of those days."

The word great is not given. That is your personal square, that Matthew is pointing to "that" tribulation, another erroneous square of interpretation.

What is the definition of the church's tribulation as given by the majority of eschatology? Is it persecution from man, or judgment from God? What is the time of Jacob's trouble then?

Jesus already outlined the tribulation of those days in verses 4 through 13.

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

This is not about tribulation lasting all the way to the end. This is saying the Gospel will be preached until the end.

And no human can endure 2,000 years of tribulation, so no one can endure for your definition of tribulation. Enduring is about the tribulation each individual must face during their time on earth. All must endure, not just a single group during a short time called Jacob's trouble. Verse 13 is not about this:

"For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."

Verse 13 is about the last 1993 years since the Cross.

So after the tribulation of those days, does not demand just the time of great tribulation. It is just stating that there will be days of tribulation for the church until the Second Coming.

Matthew is not giving us the specific timing, because not even Jesus knew the specific timing. Stating the Second Coming is at a certain time after a certain period is date setting, and not even Jesus would set a date, nor period in which He would return.

The Second Coming cannot be after a specific event. The Second Coming can happen prior to a specific event, because it will not matter after Jesus is already here on the earth.

Well the tribulation is the wrath of God which is made clear in numerous passages in Revelation. This tribulation is not the tribulation of the church for it is the wrath of God of which we were not made for. It is the 70th week of God's judgment on Israel.

 

[taisto]

Well the tribulation is the wrath of God which is made clear in numerous passages in Revelation. This tribulation is not the tribulation of the church for it is the wrath of God of which we were not made for. It is the 70th week of God's judgment on Israel.

There are two things happening simultaneously.
First, in Revelation 7, believers are sealed with the mark before God can harm the earth in judgment against those who are later marked by Satan and his two henchmen, the Beast and the second beast.
Second, the opening of the scroll shows us a cycle of the same events that come as a result of God's people having been marked by God.
The seals, in Revelation 6, the trumpets, in Revelation 8, and the bowls, in Revelation 16, all mark the same events with each one showing more details. It is very reminiscent of Ezekiels description of God coming in Ezekiel 1. The closer he looks, the more details are revealed. (Note, Revelation 1 tells us that John is giving us a picture book, not an historical novel.)

The tribulation we go through is not God's wrath on the world. We don't experience God's wrath, but we do live through the famine, pestilence, and natural disasters (Revelation 5). We suffer the persecution brought on by the Dragon and his henchmen. God allows them a season of mistreatment of God's children. We are called to endure and to take heart in this endurance because Christ Jesus has already won, even if we must carry or cross to "Golgotha" and die there as well.

It seems to me that you may not be seeing this distinct difference.

 

[timtofly]

Well the tribulation is the wrath of God which is made clear in numerous passages in Revelation. This tribulation is not the tribulation of the church for it is the wrath of God of which we were not made for. It is the 70th week of God's judgment on Israel.

There seems to be a difference between God's wrath, God's judgment, God's punishment. None of these should be considered tribulation. Tribulation in general just means trouble.


"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold."

All of the above is considered trouble or great tribulation, and has happened since the Cross. Now what of the above is considered God's punishment, God's Judgment, or even God's wrath?

Many even claim 70AD was all of the above, but 70AD did not even pertain to the NT church. It was the last punishment of the OT Covenant, and them declaring the blood of Jesus was on their hands , and their children's hands. It was declared already in Daniel 9:26, because the Cross was a sure thing, not plan B.

Daniel 9:27 is still future as well as Matthew 24:15-30.

Jesus was addressing His disciples in private, as the firstfruits of the NT church. And yes, Jesus declared they or someone connected to them would see the return of Israel, the Second Coming, the time of great tribulation, and the AoD.

The problem seems to be many do not get the point when Jesus comes the Second Time it is to work personally with Israel on the earth. And the church is removed on His way to the Mount of Olives. The firstfruits in 30AD, were both Israel and the church.

Since the Cross the line between Israel and the church was blurred, as Israel was placed under partial blindness, and there were no natural branches, so no difference between Israel and Gentile.

 

[taisto]

The problem seems to be many do not get the point when Jesus comes the Second Time it is to work personally with Israel on the earth. And the church is removed on His way to the Mount of Olives. The firstfruits in 30AD, were both Israel and the church.

Since the Cross the line between Israel and the church was blurred, as Israel was placed under partial blindness, and there were no natural branches, so no difference between Israel and Gentile.

Romans 2, Romans 9, Romans 11, Galatians 3, they all tell us that we, the Church, are the spiritual Israel of God.

Jesus does come back to live with the Church forevermore as we see in Revelation 21 and Revelation 22.

The Old Covenant is eternally finished. Ethnic Israel is now no longer important as the Promised One from the line of Judah has come and has finished the requirements of the Law. The New Covenant is here, which is a promise of the Abrahamic Covenant to bless all the nations.

The Root and main stem of the Tree has always been Christ Jesus. There has always been a remnant from Israel that is found at the lower branches. They remain, but many branches were cut off. Yet, even today, some ethnic Jews are coming to faith in Christ (One of my Bible study mates is one of them) and being grafted back in.

God will not restore the old covenant for ethnic Israel. It was ended at the cross. What we see today in Israel is ungodly people attempting to rebuild a dead system that God has finished, much like the ancient Babylonians attempted to erect a tower in their honor. It will not end well. Jesus is the once for all sacrifice. He is the temple and He is the High Priest. There will be no physical slaughter of animals for sacrifice because Jesus paid it all. Any return to the old system will be an idolatrous act of Rebellion against our King. He will not allow it to go on. He will destroy it.

 

[Revmitchell]

There seems to be a difference between God's wrath, God's judgment, God's punishment. None of these should be considered tribulation. Tribulation in general just means trouble.

All of those are God's wrath and the tribulation period is that very thing according to scripture.

Revelation 14:10;19; 15:1, 7; 16:19; 19:15

 

[canadyjd]

Well the tribulation is the wrath of God which is made clear in numerous passages in Revelation. This tribulation is not the tribulation of the church for it is the wrath of God of which we were not made for. It is the 70th week of God's judgment on Israel.

This is the very first I have seen this view. So “great tribulation” equals “wrath of God against God’s enemies”?

I would interested in seeing specific passages that make that connection.

peace to you

 

[Revmitchell]

This is the very first I have seen this view. So “great tribulation” equals “wrath of God against God’s enemies”?

I would interested in seeing specific passages that make that connection.

peace to you

The first? it is a common view among pretribers and is taught in most seminaries. see post 306

 

[timtofly]

Romans 2, Romans 9, Romans 11, Galatians 3, they all tell us that we, the Church, are the spiritual Israel of God.

Jesus does come back to live with the Church forevermore as we see in Revelation 21 and Revelation 22.

The Old Covenant is eternally finished. Ethnic Israel is now no longer important as the Promised One from the line of Judah has come and has finished the requirements of the Law. The New Covenant is here, which is a promise of the Abrahamic Covenant to bless all the nations.

The Root and main stem of the Tree has always been Christ Jesus. There has always been a remnant from Israel that is found at the lower branches. They remain, but many branches were cut off. Yet, even today, some ethnic Jews are coming to faith in Christ (One of my Bible study mates is one of them) and being grafted back in.

God will not restore the old covenant for ethnic Israel. It was ended at the cross. What we see today in Israel is ungodly people attempting to rebuild a dead system that God has finished, much like the ancient Babylonians attempted to erect a tower in their honor. It will not end well. Jesus is the once for all sacrifice. He is the temple and He is the High Priest. There will be no physical slaughter of animals for sacrifice because Jesus paid it all. Any return to the old system will be an idolatrous act of Rebellion against our King. He will not allow it to go on. He will destroy it.

I never posted the OT Covenant would be restored.

The church did not replace Israel. That is not found in any of those chapters you listed.

All this is human theology run amok and did not even address my post. You claim the church is now Israel. If that is true, the church would have to live under the OT as natural branches, because that is Israel. Israel is not the new church. The church is not in Israel. The church is in Christ. The OT Israel was not even in Israel. They were in Christ. Individuals were cut off. Can you explain in this analogy why a branch would want to be grafted in and then cut off? What is the point of faith, if faith can be reversed? Isreal was not a branch because they had faith. They stopped being a natural branch because of unbelief. They rejected the significance of the OT Covenant.

There would be no more natural branches after the Cross. But Israel will be restored, because God never said their blindness was permanent. It was only in part until the completion of the Gentile church. That is the point you deny and the reason you did not even address my post. Instead you posted excuses, why there cannot be a Millennium Kingdom on the earth. It certainly is not going to be under the Law of Mt Sinai.

It will be under the comfort set up in the Garden of Eden before Adam disobeyed God. This is the restoration of Adam's disobedience, not the disobedience of OT Israel.

 

[taisto]

All of those are God's wrath and the tribulation period is that very thing according to scripture.

Revelation 14:10;19; 15:1, 7; 16:19; 19:15

There are two different things going on.
The wrath of God that falls upon those in rebellion to God who will not repent when the call for repentance is given.
The persecution of the saints by the minions of the Satan, the Dragon. Both are taking place on the earth even as I write this.

 

[timtofly]

All of those are God's wrath and the tribulation period is that very thing according to scripture.

Revelation 14:10;19; 15:1, 7; 16:19; 19:15

So punishment is God's wrath on the saints?

Is there a difference between punishment and wrath?

 

[taisto]

I never posted the OT Covenant would be restored.

The church did not replace Israel. That is not found in any of those chapters you listed.

All this is human theology run amok and did not even address my post. You claim the church is now Israel. If that is true, the church would have to live under the OT as natural branches, because that is Israel. Israel is not the new church. The church is not in Israel. The church is in Christ. The OT Israel was not even in Israel. They were in Christ. Individuals were cut off. Can you explain in this analogy why a branch would want to be grafted in and then cut off? What is the point of faith, if faith can be reversed? Isreal was not a branch because they had faith. They stopped being a natural branch because of unbelief. They rejected the significance of the OT Covenant.

There would be no more natural branches after the Cross. But Israel will be restored, because God never said their blindness was permanent. It was only in part until the completion of the Gentile church. That is the point you deny and the reason you did not even address my post. Instead you posted excuses, why there cannot be a Millennium Kingdom on the earth. It certainly is not going to be under the Law of Mt Sinai.

It will be under the comfort set up in the Garden of Eden before Adam disobeyed God. This is the restoration of Adam's disobedience, not the disobedience of OT Israel.

The Church has always been the Israel of God. There has always been a remnant within national Israel that is a part of the Church. God's promises of redemption were given far before Israel as a nation ever existed. National Israel had it's purpose for bringing to earth the Promised One who would set His people free, from every nation, tribe, and tongue. National Israel could not see this, even though God had told Abraham this very thing.

There has never been a "replacement." That is your human labeling speaking, not God's word speaking.

The Church has always been a part of the Vine. Gentiles, however, were grafted into the promise that had the Messiah (Promised One) coming from the line of Judah. Now, the entire world is privy to this truth and to this blessing. It's not hidden away in Palestine and in 12 clans.

Today, ancestral Jews, just like Gentiles, are being grafted into the Tree. The Tree is not National Israel. The Tree is Christ Jesus and some of the first Branches were Israelites. It is there that the whole world can read of the Promise.
Paul tells us that national Israel was blessed because they were the first to be given the Promise. But, they failed to share this Promise with the entire world. Instead, they rejected the Promise and the axe fell (read the parable of the unfruitful fig tree). We were grafted in as wild branches that need pruning, but we can be cut as well if we don't produce fruit.

You are attempting to create a barrier when Christ has torn down that wall. There is now, therefore, no Jew nor Gentile, no slave nor free, no male nor female. There is only Christ Jesus.

It is time to let go of the false barrier of national Israel.

 

[timtofly]

The Church has always been the Israel of God. There has always been a remnant within national Israel that is a part of the Church. God's promises of redemption were given far before Israel as a nation ever existed. National Israel had it's purpose for bringing to earth the Promised One who would set His people free, from every nation, tribe, and tongue. National Israel could not see this, even though God had told Abraham this very thing.

There has never been a "replacement." That is your human labeling speaking, not God's word speaking.

The Church has always been a part of the Vine. Gentiles, however, were grafted into the promise that had the Messiah (Promised One) coming from the line of Judah. Now, the entire world is privy to this truth and to this blessing. It's not hidden away in Palestine and in 12 clans.

Today, ancestral Jews, just like Gentiles, are being grafted into the Tree. The Tree is not National Israel. The Tree is Christ Jesus and some of the first Branches were Israelites. It is there that the whole world can read of the Promise.
Paul tells us that national Israel was blessed because they were the first to be given the Promise. But, they failed to share this Promise with the entire world. Instead, they rejected the Promise and the axe fell (read the parable of the unfruitful fig tree). We were grafted in as wild branches that need pruning, but we can be cut as well if we don't produce fruit.

You are attempting to create a barrier when Christ has torn down that wall. There is now, therefore, no Jew nor Gentile, no slave nor free, no male nor female. There is only Christ Jesus.

It is time to let go of the false barrier of national Israel.

You are splitting Israel into two different groups. Israel was the spiritual term given to all of Jacob. Not two Israels. National Israel was always in Christ, until they were cut off, on an individual basis. There is no national Israel between the Cross and the Second Coming.

 

[taisto]

You are splitting Israel into two different groups. Israel was the spiritual term given to all of Jacob. Not two Israels. National Israel was always in Christ, until they were cut off, on an individual basis. There is no national Israel between the Cross and the Second Coming.

Nope.
I am explaining to you what Paul tells us in Romans 2, Romans 9, Romans 11 and Galatians 3.
Israel has always been the people justified by faith alone. It has never been about genetic lineage as the means of salvation.

 

[Revmitchell]

So punishment is God's wrath on the saints?

Is there a difference between punishment and wrath?

Not sure where you are coming from with this question. This punishment is the wrath of God as clearly delineated in Revelation. Believers are not made for the wrath of God. The nature of the Tribulation period is God's wrath. The church will not be here during the trib.

 

[taisto]

Not sure where you are coming from with this question. This punishment is the wrath of God as clearly delineated in Revelation. Believers are not made for the wrath of God. The nature of the Tribulation period is God's wrath. The church will not be here during the trib.

I disagree with your last sentence. There is no evidence in the Bible to make that assertion. Nowhere do we see a rapture of Christians before God deals with sinners who are marked by the Beast. In fact, we see the Beast persecuting Christians.

One of the reasons I left futurism (pre-trib dispensationalism) is because I couldn't find the teaching explicitly or even implicitly in the Bible. All the charts and graphs and timelines were created from presuppositions that were not supported by scripture.

 

[canadyjd]

The first? it is a common view among pretribers and is taught in most seminaries. see post 306

Thanks for the info. From Revelation 14 it states the torment is forever. Will the wrath of God be poured out on God’s enemies on earth forever? Is the lake of fire on earth, according to pre-trib theology?

I admit have not studied pre-tribulation theology in depth. I couldn’t get passed Matthew 24 and 25.

peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

I disagree with your last sentence. There is no evidence in the Bible to make that assertion. Nowhere do we see a rapture of Christians before God deals with sinners who are marked by the Beast. In fact, we see the Beast persecuting Christians.

One of the reasons I left futurism (pre-trib dispensationalism) is because I couldn't find the teaching explicitly or even implicitly in the Bible. All the charts and graphs and timelines were created from presuppositions that were not supported by scripture.

@taisto you keep disagreeing with the pretrib view but I have not seen any support by you from scripture for what you do support.

Found this online:

Some posttribulationists view the entire present age as the tribulation, although the majority accept the literal interpretation of the tribulation period as a portrayal of actual events preceding the Second Advent. J. Dwight Pentecost comments:

(1) Posttribulationism must be based on a denial of dispensationalism and all dispensational distinctions. It is only thus that they can place the church in that period which is particularly called "the time of Jacob's trouble" (Jer_30:7). (2) Consequently, the position rests on a denial of the distinctions between Israel and the church. (3) The position must rest on a denial of the Scriptural teaching concerning the nature and purpose of the tribulation.... (4) The posttribulationist must deny all the distinctions observed from Scriptures between the rapture and the second advent, making them one and the same event. (5) The posttribulationist must deny the doctrine of imminence,... and substitute the teaching that a multitude of signs must be fulfilled before the Lord can possibly come. (6) The posttribulationist denies any future fulfillment to the prophecy of Dan_9:24-27, claiming it for an historical fulfillment. (7) The posttribulationist must apply major passages of Scripture that outline God's program for Israel (Mat_13:1-58; Mat_24:1-51; Mat_25:1-46; Rev_4:1-11; Rev_5:1-14; Rev_6:1-17; Rev_7:1-17; Rev_8:1-13; Rev_9:1-21; Rev_10:1-11; Rev_11:1-19; Rev_12:1-17; Rev_13:1-18; Rev_14:1-20; Rev_15:1-8; Rev_16:1-21; Rev_17:1-18; Rev_18:1-24; Rev_19:1-21) to the church in order to support his views...."

The essential arguments of the posttribulationists include: (1) "the historical argument" (that the pre-trib view is a new teaching and should be discarded); (2) "the argument against imminency"; (3) "the promise of tribulation" (this relates to Israel and not the church, except in a non-technical sense); (4) "the historical fulfillment of Dan_9:24-27"; (5) "the argument from resurrection" (that the Rapture and resurrection are linked together; cf. Dan_12:1-3 concerning the resurrection of the OT saints); and (6) "the argument from the wheat and tares" (cf. Mat_13:30)."

John Walvoord contends that, "the church is never found in any portion of Scripture dealing with the time of the tribulation, and the translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage picturing the return of Christ to set up His millennial kingdom." Walvoord goes further to say that "posttribulationism is built principally upon the identification of the church with tribulation saints, a conclusion which is without substantiation in Scripture."

 

[taisto]

@taisto you keep disagreeing with the pretrib view but I have not seen any support by you from scripture for what you do support.

Found this online:

Some posttribulationists view the entire present age as the tribulation, although the majority accept the literal interpretation of the tribulation period as a portrayal of actual events preceding the Second Advent. J. Dwight Pentecost comments:

(1) Posttribulationism must be based on a denial of dispensationalism and all dispensational distinctions. It is only thus that they can place the church in that period which is particularly called "the time of Jacob's trouble" (Jer_30:7). (2) Consequently, the position rests on a denial of the distinctions between Israel and the church. (3) The position must rest on a denial of the Scriptural teaching concerning the nature and purpose of the tribulation.... (4) The posttribulationist must deny all the distinctions observed from Scriptures between the rapture and the second advent, making them one and the same event. (5) The posttribulationist must deny the doctrine of imminence,... and substitute the teaching that a multitude of signs must be fulfilled before the Lord can possibly come. (6) The posttribulationist denies any future fulfillment to the prophecy of Dan_9:24-27, claiming it for an historical fulfillment. (7) The posttribulationist must apply major passages of Scripture that outline God's program for Israel (Mat_13:1-58; Mat_24:1-51; Mat_25:1-46; Rev_4:1-11; Rev_5:1-14; Rev_6:1-17; Rev_7:1-17; Rev_8:1-13; Rev_9:1-21; Rev_10:1-11; Rev_11:1-19; Rev_12:1-17; Rev_13:1-18; Rev_14:1-20; Rev_15:1-8; Rev_16:1-21; Rev_17:1-18; Rev_18:1-24; Rev_19:1-21) to the church in order to support his views...."

The essential arguments of the posttribulationists include: (1) "the historical argument" (that the pre-trib view is a new teaching and should be discarded); (2) "the argument against imminency"; (3) "the promise of tribulation" (this relates to Israel and not the church, except in a non-technical sense); (4) "the historical fulfillment of Dan_9:24-27"; (5) "the argument from resurrection" (that the Rapture and resurrection are linked together; cf. Dan_12:1-3 concerning the resurrection of the OT saints); and (6) "the argument from the wheat and tares" (cf. Mat_13:30)."

John Walvoord contends that, "the church is never found in any portion of Scripture dealing with the time of the tribulation, and the translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage picturing the return of Christ to set up His millennial kingdom." Walvoord goes further to say that "posttribulationism is built principally upon the identification of the church with tribulation saints, a conclusion which is without substantiation in Scripture."

First, I have provided passages from all over the Bible, both in this thread and the other rapture thread. It's time you started reading.
Second, Pentacost and Walvoord are both dyed in the wool dispensationalist/futurists who have influenced evangelicals to just take their word for it and not question their eschatology. What I have found is that futurists will actually question a person's salvation if a believer doesn't hold to the pre-trib, dispensationalist, futurism view. I have seen vile hatred and anger that from futurists that is equal to the January 6th rioters in Washington DC. It's irrational hatred from some because they have bought into the system. They won't even entertain the idea that futurism could be wrong.

Third, your quote from Pentacost is about post-trib so Pentacost isn't actually addressing amillenialism. He's lumping any view that isn't futurism into one bucket and then making sweeping claims as he posts the same verses I point to for the Amillennial view.

Finally, at this point, not one futurist has actually provided scripture that clearly stated that Jesus will rapture believers out of the earth before tribulation happens. Presuppositions have been proposed (God's wrath on sinners cannot happen if Christians are left), but no actual text proves a pre-trib rapture. The interesting inconsistency of a pre-trib rapture that says God's wrath on the ungodly cannot fall until Christians are removed is that, in their view, there would be at least 144,000 Israelite Christians who actually suffer during that timeframe. Yet, you're telling me God cannot bring his wrath in the ungodly if Christians remain? That's so inconsistent.

I point you to Kim Riddelbarger and his book Understanding the End Times as a book that shows you scripture from the entire Bible.

Amillennialism (Audio, Links, Charts) — The Riddleblog

I also point you to Robert Mounce and his commentary on Revelation which shows you John's connection to the Old Testament and the prophets.

I point you to Eric Alexander, RC Sproul, Voddie Baucham, Sinclair Ferguson, John Piper, Kevin DeYoung, and Allistair Begg, just to name a few, who are steeped in scripture and are all Amillennial in their understanding of scripture.

I leave you with a passage that John often points to in Revelation.
(Psalm 2:1-12)
Why are the nations so angry? Why do they waste their time with futile plans? The kings of the earth prepare for battle; the rulers plot together against the Lord and against his anointed one. “Let us break their chains,” they cry, “and free ourselves from slavery to God.” But the one who rules in heaven laughs. The Lord scoffs at them. Then in anger he rebukes them, terrifying them with his fierce fury. For the Lord declares, “I have placed my chosen king on the throne in Jerusalem, on my holy mountain.” The king proclaims the Lord’s decree: “The Lord said to me, ‘You are my son. Today I have become your Father. Only ask, and I will give you the nations as your inheritance, the whole earth as your possession. You will break them with an iron rod and smash them like clay pots.’” Now then, you kings, act wisely! Be warned, you rulers of the earth! Serve the Lord with reverent fear, and rejoice with trembling. Submit to God’s royal son, or he will become angry, and you will be destroyed in the midst of all your activities— for his anger flares up in an instant. But what joy for all who take refuge in him!

 

[Silverhair]

First, I have provided passages from all over the Bible, both in this thread and the other rapture thread. It's time you started reading.
Second, Pentacost and Walvoord are both dyed in the wool dispensationalist/futurists who have influenced evangelicals to just take their word for it and not question their eschatology. What I have found is that futurists will actually question a person's salvation if a believer doesn't hold to the pre-trib, dispensationalist, futurism view. I have seen vile hatred and anger that from futurists that is equal to the January 6th rioters in Washington DC. It's irrational hatred from some because they have bought into the system. They won't even entertain the idea that futurism could be wrong.

Third, your quote from Pentacost is about post-trib so Pentacost isn't actually addressing amillenialism. He's lumping any view that isn't futurism into one bucket and then making sweeping claims as he posts the same verses I point to for the Amillennial view.

Finally, at this point, not one futurist has actually provided scripture that clearly stated that Jesus will rapture believers out of the earth before tribulation happens. Presuppositions have been proposed (God's wrath on sinners cannot happen if Christians are left), but no actual text proves a pre-trib rapture. The interesting inconsistency of a pre-trib rapture that says God's wrath on the ungodly cannot fall until Christians are removed is that, in their view, there would be at least 144,000 Israelite Christians who actually suffer during that timeframe. Yet, you're telling me God cannot bring his wrath in the ungodly if Christians remain? That's so inconsistent.

I point you to Kim Riddelbarger and his book Understanding the End Times as a book that shows you scripture from the entire Bible.

Amillennialism (Audio, Links, Charts) — The Riddleblog

I also point you to Robert Mounce and his commentary on Revelation which shows you John's connection to the Old Testament and the prophets.

I point you to Eric Alexander, RC Sproul, Voddie Baucham, Sinclair Ferguson, John Piper, Kevin DeYoung, and Allistair Begg, just to name a few, who are steeped in scripture and are all Amillennial in their understanding of scripture.

I leave you with a passage that John often points to in Revelation.
(Psalm 2:1-12)
Why are the nations so angry? Why do they waste their time with futile plans? The kings of the earth prepare for battle; the rulers plot together against the Lord and against his anointed one. “Let us break their chains,” they cry, “and free ourselves from slavery to God.” But the one who rules in heaven laughs. The Lord scoffs at them. Then in anger he rebukes them, terrifying them with his fierce fury. For the Lord declares, “I have placed my chosen king on the throne in Jerusalem, on my holy mountain.” The king proclaims the Lord’s decree: “The Lord said to me, ‘You are my son. Today I have become your Father. Only ask, and I will give you the nations as your inheritance, the whole earth as your possession. You will break them with an iron rod and smash them like clay pots.’” Now then, you kings, act wisely! Be warned, you rulers of the earth! Serve the Lord with reverent fear, and rejoice with trembling. Submit to God’s royal son, or he will become angry, and you will be destroyed in the midst of all your activities— for his anger flares up in an instant. But what joy for all who take refuge in him!

You start of saying that Pentacost and Walvoord can not be trusted as they are both dyed in the wool dispensationalist/futurists then you list people that support your view as if I should trust them. Why? Are they not dyed in the wool? Well they must be as you say they are are steeped in scripture and are all Amillennial in their understanding of scripture.

This is where the problem comes in, you can find scholars that support various views so it all depends on whom you wish to trust. I have said before that I do not get caught up in this discussion as it will not be resolved by man. I am just curious as to what people use to support their view.

If Christians are caught up prior to the tribulation or if we go through half or all of it is really not of much concern as we will be protected by God.

I do note that you support the Amillennial view so I am curious as to what you do with Revelation 20:1-5?